What are the true origins of the Clovis and Solutrean cultures? Why has the obvious history of Whites in ancient America been covered up?
Friday will be the finale of Season 10 of Ancient Aliens. The show hails Erich von Daniken and Zecharia Sitchin as innovators. However, none of their ideas, nor much of what is suggested by this new pop culture paradigm, are actually original, including the works of Graham Hancock whom I discussed in previous articles. Hancock, who is a frequented guest on Ancient Aliens, often says that folklore and mythology are really remnants of humanity’s racial memory, and its what remains of a real history of a lost civilization that was destroyed at the end of the last Ice Age.
The Ancient Alien Theory, or Ancient Astronaut Theory, was first put forth in modern times by von Daniken and Sitchin. It states that an ancient and advanced extraterrestrial race came to Earth, perhaps even colonized it, and created humans through genetic manipulation, and eventually shared their technology with us and have been a constant force throughout our history. Over the past 7 years this theory has taken on a life of its own, and now people claim that multiple extraterrestrial races have visited and continue to visit the Earth, and have their own secret agenda, working undercover with the world’s governments to possibly modify, enslave or even exterminate humanity. This is hogwash. The ancient astronaut theory is nothing new. In fact, as D.M. Murdock points out “it should be noted that neither man came up with the ancient astronaut theory, which was largely developed by a German occultic society, for one, during the 19th century.” It was also a popular theme in the Edda Society, the Thule Society, the Vril Society, Himmler’s Ancestral Heritage Society, a research arm of the SS, and even leading members of the NSDAP, including Hitler himself. Murdock also points out that the idea itself goes back not just a few decades to von Daniken or the National Socialists, but rather to a very ancient time.
Although the idea of the ancient gods being aliens may seem novel, the tendency to make the gods of old into “real people” or “flesh and blood” is not at all new, dating to before the time of the Greek historian Herodotus (5th c. BCE) and developed by the Greek philosopher Euhemeros or Evemeras (c. 300 BCE). This tendency is called, in fact, “euhemerism” or “evemerism,” which claims that the numerous gods of various cultures were not “mythical” but were in reality kings, queens, warriors and assorted heroes whose lives were turned into fairytales with the addition of miraculous details to their biographies. The current Anunnaki thesis is a modern version of evemerism, although it seeks to explain the miracles as not fabulous “additions” to the tales but genuine attributes of advanced extraterrestrials.
This is basically Giorgio Tsoukalos’ usual “Its the Ancient Aliens!” story, in which he explains how all our myths are merely “misinterpreted accounts of flesh in blood aliens.” Giorgio often claims that by calling these ancient accounts myths we are robbing the ancients of their real history, which has been rather confused and misinterpreted, but true history nonetheless. The mythologist Joseph Campbell pointed out that the ancients knew they were myths, but were concerned rather with their symbolic significance. Rather than interpreting these myths in a literal extraterrestrial sense, he used them as a symbolic reference to an even greater truth.
There is concrete archaeological evidence of the advanced nature of ancient white civilization and significant evidence that the gods were in fact Ancient Aryans. Recently on In Search of Aliens, Giorgio Tsoukalos and David Childress went to investigate a series of elongated skulls found in Paracas. They were hoping to prove that the skulls were of ancient alien origin. Rather than getting that input, the curator at the museum told them the elongated skulls were determined to belong to an unknown race, an actual group of men naturally born with elongated skulls; not a deformity but an actual race. Their closest DNA match proved they were not of South American origin, but rather tested to have originated from Denmark, Sweden and Finland. The date was 3500 B.C. This was shocking to them. Since this broadcast, they have back-peddled and are now claiming that the DNA did not match any known “organism” on this planet. This is simply not the case, and they never air that show anymore. Reconstructions of the face show a very Nordic facial structure, but of course with the huge cranium. The original drawings were eventually made into a new artist representation that made them look like South American Indians. I guess showing them blonde and blue-eyed would be too Nazi or racist for them. I’m neither qualified or inclined to suggest how or why they have elongated skulls. If I did wish to speculate, I would say that this could be a separate branch of the White race the went along its own evolutionary path over 5,000 years ago or more then went extinct.
The fact is that these skulls, all testing to be of Scandinavian or Nordic origin, is hard evidence for my theory that in distant times, that a lost civilization 12,000 years ago or more had traveled the globe and been the founders of ancient cultures, and the Paracas skulls were the remains of a long-standing Ancient Aryan population that once existed in South America. Many Old European sites, including those on Malta and Sardinia, plus in Egyptian tombs, were scattered with burials of men with elongated skulls. This is not going to be solved quickly, as the academics do not wish to press the issue, not only for the ancient alien implication, but also not to awaken any facts about our Ancient Aryan past. The Jews are using such authors, as well as the ancient alien camp, to confound our race to the point that we deny our own accomplishments as a race. The White race did not need ancient aliens to build our ancient civilizations, or to found other civilizations in remote corners of the Earth. Our race is capable of so much more. Ancient Alien theorists are selling our people short. As stated last year in an article entitled “Aryan Genesis,” the location of the original Aryan homeland remains an unsolvable riddle. In Aryan Genesis I wrote:
For almost three centuries, European linguists, anthropologists and geneticists have been searching for the true origins of the Indo-European, or Aryan, peoples. Many of us identify the term Aryan with German National Socialism, while some Jewish and liberal academics propose that Aryans are a non-existent people invented by Hitler to enhance a feeling of Germanic supremacy. This is of course false.”
We know, from both the Hindu Vedas and ancient Zoroastrian texts from Persia, that a northern race of powerful warriors invaded the areas of present Iran, northern India, Pakistan and Afghanistan around 3500 B.C. and established an empire known as Aryas. Over 300 words in the Indo-European languages are derived from these people, including the name Iran. Archaeologists of the 19th century referred to the Aryans as Indo-European or Indo-Germanic tribes. However, in Hinduism and in Iran the term Aryan means “noble,” and this race is often called the “Shining Ones” who were pitted against the forces of darkness, often called the Dasyus or the ”Dark Ones.”
The ancient symbol of the Aryan was the swastika. But where did the Aryans start using this controversial symbol? Hindu legend says that civilization dates back to an incredibly distant time, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years, and that the ancestors of the Aryans were blond, oftentimes bearded, light-skinned people led by their Lord Indra. The earliest record of the swastika in India dates back to the Indus Valley civilization around 3500 B.C. This time period coincides with the Aryan invasion theory.
Recently, an even more ancient civilization, the Danubian civilization, was found which dates roughly to 5,000 years B.C., about the time a huge freshwater lake north of the Bosporus flooded from water pouring in from the Mediterranean that transformed it into the Black Sea. This body of water increased greatly in size and submerged hundreds of square miles of dry land.
In Bulgaria, dating to this time, a pottery shard from the Danubian civilization dating back to 5300 B.C. was discovered bearing the sign of the swastika. In Kiev’s Natural History Museum, an ivory sculpture made from mammoth tusks dating back to the Paleolithic era (Old Stone Age), some 25,000 years ago, bears this symbol. The idea that a group of Europeans known as the Solutreans migrated across the northern ice-shelf to North America 6,000 years before the Mongoloids arrived in 18,000 B.C might indicate why American Indians, including the Mayas and Aztecs, also use swastikas in their art.
Authors Graham Hancock and Andrew Collins believe that an ancient site called Gobekli Tepe, a vast ceremonial complex with gigantic pillars and altars that dates to before the flooding of the Black Sea, were created by an advanced unknown culture. They are quick to assume Atlanteans or aliens created it. This is hogwash. Our white ancestors had been watching the stars for thousands of years and were quite advanced. Scholars also have never quite found the location of the Urheimat (or primordial homeland) of the Proto-Aryans. The fact that they watched the sky and were the first true astronomers may be the origin of ancient references to sky-people, not aliens.
I suggest that these Proto-Aryans evolved in the lands now submerged beneath the Black Sea. The typically accepted map of Aryan DNA distributions indicates the strongest concentrations of these people in and around the Black Sea then emanating outward to Europe, India and central Asia. The Danubian civilization originated shortly after the deluge, known as the Great Flood.
An article printed by National Vanguard in the December 2005 edition states:
In June 2005, archeologists found Europe’s oldest formalized civilization, a network of dozens of temples, 2,000 years older than Stonehenge and the Egyptian pyramids. More than 150 gigantic monuments were found underneath fields and cities in Germany, Austria, and Slovakia built more than 7,000 years ago, in 4800 B.C. and 4600 B.C.”
These cities post-dated Gobekli Tepe; that complex still remains the oldest structure, dating back some 12,000 years. But these discoveries show that civilized white people have been in existence for a very long time.
National Vanguard also says that a discovery in Slovakia of 35,000-year-old skeletons of clearly Nordic skull dimensions proves that the idea we were very African-like at this point is false. In the 1990s, an ancient primate was discovered in what is now northern Germany. Also around this time, younger fossils dating to around 2.5 million years and resembling upright walking hominids found in Africa were found in the Republic of Georgia. This only intensifies Alan Thornes’ argument of independent evolution of modern races.
The Ancient Aliens theorists have no real evidence, but raw speculation. So far not one genuine shred of evidence has surfaced that clearly says the ancient gods of the Sumerian and Babylonian tradition came from beyond the stars. Because an ancient god had wings or strange, bulky apparel doesn’t mean he was an extraterrestrial. In my opinion, it is very possible that visitations from extraterrestrials did happen in ancient times. It is even possible that we were seeded here by a higher authority, but I will not conclude that the majority of our accomplishments as a race can be attributed to extraterrestrials. And if they could be, I believe there is evidence of advanced Caucasian-like beings that could be our White Aryan ancestors.
Is There Anything Equal about us?
It is a fact of nature in this universe that no two things are ever the same. In nature there is always variation. In manufacturing, try as hard as we might, no two objects ever come out the same. Any given type of object such as an ant hill or a human will be similar to others of its class but will differ in the defining characteristics. By defining characteristics, I mean such things as shape, weight, dimensions, color, smell, etc. Or course a human is defined by many characteristics, how many, I do not know, but intelligence is definitely one of them, and genetics plays a major role in how intelligent an individual is, as well as a group average.
For any characteristic of interest, such as height, we find that no two ant hills are the same, just as there are no two humans the same. If you measure the height close enough, there will always be a difference — between two humans or between two ant hills. The same goes for our temperament, our looks, our athletic ability, and our intelligence.
So, in answer to the posed question, I say, “No, there is no characteristic of a human that is exactly equal to another human”.
When you are born, you have — in effect — been dealt a suite of characteristics somewhat like a hand in the game of poker. There are many cards and there could be some good ones and some bad ones or they could be all bad or all good. The other people sitting around the table may have better hands or worse — it is all a matter of the luck of the draw. You are stuck with the hand you drew. But there is some room for hope: how you play the hand still may give you some chance of winning — or at least not losing badly.
But let us be careful as there is one thing worse than getting a bad deal in life and that is having false hopes. You can be dealt a hand that is simply so bad that there is little chance of you winning — no matter what you do. In that case you simply try to minimize your losses. Here, an analogy with another card game is worthwhile — Blackjack. In Blackjack, a good hand is two cards totalling 21 or something close to it. Since you have an option of drawing more cards, a low count is also not so bad. But if you draw a 14 or 15 or 16, you are in deep doodoo. No matter what you do, you will most likely lose if you are dealt those numbers. The best you can do is to try to minimize the probability of a loss but, nevertheless, you are still likely to lose.
Being born is the same kind of thing. You could have been born to rich parents or to parents living in the ghetto. You didn’t have any choice about it. You could have lots of high quality brain cells or a head full of mush. You could be healthy or terribly deformed or diseased. Or any combination of the above. It is just the luck of the draw. In spite of what our Declaration of Independence so nobly proclaims to be self-evident, we are not created equal.
Not only are we not created equal but we are not developed equally by the passage of time and the environment around us either. There is great amount of randomness in our developing lives. A chance encounter with another individual, a chance exposure to some “words of wisdom”, a chance employment, a chance gain or loss of money, etc., may cause a major rederection of our individual life path. I can think of many events in my own life that would have caused my life path to be completely different. There were times that I could have been killed or badly hurt if I had been a few feet to the left or right of where I was. There were several instances where it was pure luck that I happen to meet a person that greatly made my life much better than it could have been.
Even if we were created equal — as the Declaration of Independence says — we do not develop equally. We do not have the same environment of opportunities surrounding us. Even if by some means, we could be brought to equality at some instant of time, we would quickly drift apart again, with some becoming very blessed and some becoming miserably poor due to just sheer luck.
The Constitution provides us with a good example of the difficulties we are mired in with respect to the idea of equality. For if we are born equal, why is it necessary to compensate some of us later on?
Forced redistribution of wealth in an effort to achieve equality — by any measure — is an impossible goal. Better goals — goals with some chance of success — would be to promote ideals of compassion for the poor and otherwise disadvantaged. We are not equal. We were not born equal. We never will be equal. To try to achieve equality by government force will result in unhappiness for everyone, more hatred in society, more dishonesty and possibly a major tragedy such as a revolution, which looks more and more each day to not be that far off. It is unlikely that “forced equality” can be achieved without major violence, where everyone will suffer.
Instead, we should accept that we are all different — by any measurable characteristic of ourselves and our environment — and try to make the most of what each of us has, and since we so far have been unable to live together peacefully while accepting our differences, separation is the future to the current order.
It’s weird to think that tens of thousands of years ago, humans were mating with different species—but they were. That’s what DNA analyses tell us. When the Neanderthal genome was sequenced in 2010, it showed that as much as 1 to 4 percent of the DNA of non-Africans might have been inherited from Neanderthals. (Given that no African populations are known to have Neanderthal DNA, the matings must have occurred as modern humans moved into Europe and Asia). Scientists also announced last year that our ancestors had mated with another extinct species, and this week, more evidence is showing how widespread that interbreeding was.
We know little about this extinct species. In fact, we don’t even have a scientific name for it; for now, the group is simply known as the Denisovans. The Denisovans were discovered after a group of scientists led by Johannes Krause, now at Tübingen University in Germany, analyzed DNA extracted from the tip of a child’s finger bone. The bone was found in 2008 in Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains of Siberia and was dated to between 30,000 and 50,000 years ago. At that time, you’d expect to find either modern humans or Neanderthals living in Eurasia. But the finger bone’s DNA didn’t match human DNA or Neanderthal DNA. Some other kind of hominid must have also been living in the region.
A subsequent study of Denisovan DNA, in Nature, further analyzed the finger bone’s DNA and DNA from an adult molar tooth also found in Denisova Cave. Based on the physical characteristics of the tooth, it didn’t appear to be from a human or a Neanderthal, and the DNA was similar to that from the finger. David Reich of Harvard University and his colleagues furthermore compared Denisovan DNA with modern human DNA and concluded that as much as 5 percent of the DNA of people living in Melanesia could be from Denisovans—evidence of more interbreeding. Another study confirmed that Australian aborigines, Polynesians and other people of Oceania also had a Denisovan heritage. Now it appears that Southeast Asians do as well. This week Pontus Skoglunda and Mattias Jakobsson, both of Uppsala University in Sweden, reported in PNAS that Denisovan DNA may account for about 1 percent of modern Southeast Asian DNA.
The idea that our ancestors mated with other species may not be too shocking. Species today will mate with other closely related species if they come across each other in nature (or captivity). This occurs among olive baboons and hamadryas baboons that have overlapping ranges in Ethiopia. The idea probably seems surprising because it’s hard to imagine we once shared the planet with beings so similar to us. What was it like to meet other human-like individuals who weren’t quite human?
The story of our past inter-species matings is far from complete. We still don’t know who the Denisovans really were. Today, the fragment of the finger bone and the molar tooth are the sole fossils that scientists have assigned to the group. It’s impossible to say what physical features distinguished the species. But it is possible we’ve already found other Denisovan fossils. Denisovans could belong to a species whose DNA we’ve never been able to analyze, such as Homo heidelbergensis. And there are some hominid fossils in China that are hard to fit into any of the known species. If we could read their DNA, perhaps it would reveal they were Denisovans, too.
The term race is a traditional synonym for subspecies, however it is frequently asserted that Homo sapiens is monotypic and that what are termed races are nothing more than biological illusions. In this manuscript a case is made for the hypothesis that H. sapiens is polytypic, and in this way is no different from other species exhibiting similar levels of genetic and morphological diversity. First it is demonstrated that the four major definitions of race/subspecies can be shown to be synonymous within the context of the framework of race as a correlation structure of traits. Next the issue of taxonomic classification is considered where it is demonstrated that H. sapiens possesses high levels morphological diversity, genetic heterozygosity and differentiation (F(ST)) compared to many species that are acknowledged to be polytypic with respect to subspecies. Racial variation is then evaluated in light of the phylogenetic species concept, where it is suggested that the least inclusive monophyletic units exist below the level of species within H. sapiens indicating the existence of a number of potential human phylogenetic species; and the biological species concept, where it is determined that racial variation is too small to represent differentiation at the level of biological species. Finally the implications of this are discussed in the context of anthropology where an accurate picture of the sequence and timing of events during the evolution of human taxa are required for a complete picture of human evolution, and medicine, where a greater appreciation of the role played by human taxonomic differences in disease susceptibility and treatment responsiveness will save lives in the future.
The human family tree just got another — mysterious — branch, an African “sister species” to the heavy-browed Neanderthals that once roamed Europe.
While no fossilized bones have been found from these enigmatic people, they did leave a calling card in present-day Africans: snippets of foreign DNA.
There’s only one way that genetic material could have made it into modern human populations.
“Geneticists like euphemisms, but we’re talking about sex,” said Joshua Akey of the University of Washington in Seattle, whose lab identified the mystery DNA in three groups of modern Africans.
These genetic leftovers do not resemble DNA from any modern-day humans. The foreign DNA also does not resemble Neanderthal DNA, which shows up in the DNA of some modern-day Europeans, Akey said. That means the newly identified DNA came from an unknown group.
“We’re calling this a Neanderthal sibling species in Africa,” Akey said. He added that the interbreeding probably occurred 20,000 to 50,000 years ago, long after some modern humans had walked out of Africa to colonize Asia and Europe, and around the same time Neanderthals were waning in Europe.
The find offers more evidence that for thousands of years, modern-looking humans shared the Earth with evolutionary cousins that later died out. And whenever the groups met, whether in Africa or Europe, they did what came naturally — they bred. In fact, hominid hanky-panky seems to have occurred wherever humans met others who looked kind of like them — a controversial idea until recently.
In 2010, researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany announced finding Neanderthal DNA in the genomes of modern Europeans.
Barrel-chested people whose thick double brows, broad noses and flat faces set them apart from modern humans, Neanderthals disappeared about 25,000 or 30,000 years ago.
Another mysterious group of extinct people recently identified from a 30,000-year-old finger bone in Siberia — known as the Denisovans — also left some of their DNA in modern-day Pacific Islanders.
And while modern humans and the newly found “archaic” Africans might be classified as distinct species, they produced viable offspring. Likewise, donkeys and horses, lions and tigers.
One skull found in Nigeria with puzzling “primitive” features may represent a survivor of these mystery people — or a hybrid with anatomically modern humans — said Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London, who was not involved in the new work.
“You can argue, are these really different species?” Stringer said.
Stringer added that he was not surprised to see genetic evidence for another humanlike group in Africa that interbred with anatomically modern people, who are thought to have emerged in Africa about 200,000 years ago.
Still, without a definitive fossil, it’s impossible to say what these people looked like. But one thing is clear: This enigmatic group left its DNA all across Africa. The researchers found it in the forest-dwelling pygmies of central Africa and in two groups of hunter-gatherers on the other side of the continent — the Hadza and Sandawe people of Tanzania.
Starting a decade ago, a team led by Sarah Tishkoff and Joseph Lachance of the University of Pennsylvania drew blood from five individuals in each of the three groups. Using the latest genetic technology, Tishkoff spent $150,000 to read, or sequence, the DNA of these 15 people. The research was reported Wednesday in the journal Cell.
In addition to finding evidence of the now-extinct humans, the team discovered a huge range of genetic diversity between the three groups. The human genome contains about 3 billion letters, or base pairs, of DNA. Before this study, scientists had found that about 40 million of these letters vary across human populations.
But in the 15 Africans, Tishkoff and Lachance found 3 million more genetic variants — a huge treasure trove of human diversity. Among this stunning variety, Tishkoff says they have pinpointed some of the genes responsible for the short stature of the pygmies, who average less than 5 feet in height. She also found that immune system genes and genes for taste and smell varied wildly between the three groups — confirming Africa as the seat of the widest range of human diversity.
The oldest modern human skull, found in Ethiopia, dates to 195,000 years ago. For more than 150,000 years, then, humans shared the planet with cousin species.
Despite all the amorous advances, however, only one group survived: us.
Akey said: “As we were conquering the world, we also conquered similar human populations that were dying out.”
Analysis suggests genetic mixing occurred in Africa around 35,000 years ago.
Our ancestors bred with other species in the Homo genus, according to a study published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences1. The authors say that up to 2% of the genomes of some modern African populations may originally come from a closely related species.
Palaeontologists have long wondered whether modern humans came from a single, genetically isolated population of hominins or whether we are a genetic mix of various hominin species.
Last year, an analysis comparing the Neanderthal genome sequence to that of modern H. sapiens showed that some interbreeding did take place between the two species in Europe some time between 80 and 30,000 years ago and that, to a certain extent, Neanderthals ‘live on’ in the genes of modern humans2.
It has been a mystery whether similar genetic mixing took place among Homo species even earlier, before the populations that became modern humans left Africa.
To find out, evolutionary biologist Michael Hammer at the University of Arizona in Tucson and his colleagues studied DNA from two African hunter-gatherer groups, the Biaka Pygmies and the San, as well as from a West African agricultural population known as the Mandenka.
Each of these groups is descended from populations that are thought to have remained in Africa, meaning they would have avoided the genetic bottleneck effect that usually occurs with migration. This means the groups show particularly high genetic diversity, which makes their genomes more likely to have retained evidence of ancient genetic mixing.
“We need to modify the standard model of human origins.”
To find signs of infiltration from other Homo species, the researchers looked at 61 non-coding DNA regions in all three groups. Because direct comparison to archaic specimens wasn’t possible, the authors used computer models to simulate how infiltration from different populations might have affected patterns of variation within modern genomes.
Then they looked for such patterns of variation in the DNA of the three African populations. On chromosomes 4, 13 and 18, the researchers found genetic regions that were more divergent on average than known modern sequences at the same locations, hinting at a different origin.
Hammer and his colleagues argue that roughly 2% of the genetic material found in these modern African populations was inserted into the human genome some 35,000 years ago. They say these sequences must have come from a now-extinct member of the Homo genus that broke away from the modern human lineage around 700,000 years ago.
Hammer says this disproves the conventional view that we are descended from a single population that arose in Africa and replaced all other Homo species without interbreeding. “We need to modify the standard model of human origins,” he says.
Geneticist Sarah Tishkoff, who studies population genetics and human evolution at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, is more cautious. “This raises the possibility that there may have been ancient admixture with archaic populations,” she says.
But some researchers will require yet more convincing. “The authors model differences in very small parameters, such as the difference between no admixture and 1-2% admixture with an archaic population,” says anthropologist Brenna Henn, a graduate student at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. “The ability to discern complex models of demographic history with such a small data set, when many of the basic features of African genomes and history remain unknown, concerns me.”
Tishkoff would also like to see further work. “Analyses of whole genome sequences of these populations will be necessary to more definitively test this hypothesis,” she says.
A long-debated question concerns the fate of archaic forms of the genus Homo: did they go extinct without interbreeding with anatomically modern humans, or are their genes present in contemporary populations? This question is typically focused on the genetic contribution of archaic forms outside of Africa. Here we use DNA sequence data gathered from 61 noncoding autosomal regions in a sample of three sub-Saharan African populations (Mandenka, Biaka, and San) to test models of African archaic admixture. We use two complementary approximate-likelihood approaches and a model of human evolution that involves recent population structure, with and without gene flow from an archaic population. Extensive simulation results reject the null model of no admixture and allow us to infer that contemporary African populations contain a small proportion of genetic material (≈2%) that introgressed ≈35 kya from an archaic population that split from the ancestors of anatomically modern humans ≈700 kya. Three candidate regions showing deep haplotype divergence, unusual patterns of linkage disequilibrium, and small basal clade size are identified and the distributions of introgressive haplotypes surveyed in a sample of populations from across sub-Saharan Africa. One candidate locus with an unusual segment of DNA that extends for >31 kb on chromosome 4 seems to have introgressed into modern Africans from a now-extinct taxon that may have lived in central Africa. Taken together our results suggest that polymorphisms present in extant populations introgressed via relatively recent interbreeding with hominin forms that diverged from the ancestors of modern humans in the Lower-Middle Pleistocene.
Note: The skull outlines shown here represent a Neanderthal vs. an African Hominid, not the skulls of a modern non-African vs. a modern African, although we do see differences in those two skull types. Subspecies are loosely defined by taxonomists as groups within a species that can be recognized to percentages usually ranging from 80 to 95%. We can tell with more than 95% accuracy Whites from Blacks. Original cast by Tara: https://youtu.be/CdoiQLAcFeg Muhammad Ali on race mixing: https://youtu.be/b8ME0RJaAXY